(1.) 0 Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Gujarat Value Added Tax Tribunal dated 02/09/2014 in Second Appeal No. 347/2013, the appellant -State of Gujarat -revenue has preferred the present Tax Appeal to consider the following substantial questions of law;
(2.) 0 We have heard Shri Chintan Dave, learned AGP appearing on behalf of the appellant and Shri Mehta, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent -assessee -dealer at length. We have perused and considered the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Tribunal.
(3.) 0 Now so far as proposed question No. (B) i.e. whether the learned Tribunal has erred in deleting levy of penalty under Section 45(2)(c) of the Act is concerned, even the said issue is also held against the revenue in view of the binding decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Banu Hasim v. State of Gujarat reported in Tax Appeal No. 1842/2010. Following the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Banu Hasim (Supra), the present Tax Appeal qua question No. (B) also deserves to be dismissed.